-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
make billing more flexible in VRF 2.5 (#11909) #12072
make billing more flexible in VRF 2.5 (#11909) #12072
Conversation
* make billing more flexible in VRF 2.5 - percentage based billing - flat fee denominated in native * fix linting issues * address comments and fix failing tests * run goimports * fix linting issue
* allow 0 confirmation delays in VRF; use pending block for simulation in VRF * fix script build error * fix failing automation test * fix more tests * integraiton test wip * add integration tests for pending simulation block and zero confirmation delay (only v2 plus) and add simulation block option to superscript * Update core/chains/evm/client/simulated_backend_client.go Co-authored-by: Chris Cushman <104409744+vreff@users.noreply.github.com> * use pendingContractCall instead of low-level call contract * fix eth_call_test.go * handle nil gas and gasPrice in backend test client for estimateGas --------- Co-authored-by: Ilja Pavlovs <ilja.pavlovs@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Chris Cushman <104409744+vreff@users.noreply.github.com>
I see that you haven't updated any README files. Would it make sense to do so? |
I see that you haven't updated any CHANGELOG files. Would it make sense to do so? |
Quality Gate passedIssues Measures |
settings: | ||
autoInstallPeers: true | ||
excludeLinksFromLockfile: false | ||
lockfileVersion: 5.4 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please update your pnpm and do not commit this lock file downgrade
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yes will do locally. this PR won't get merged to develop. This should not affect how this image will work on the off-chain side of things for CL nodes
cherry-picking 2 changes on top of 2.9